If "A Modest Proposal" had been written about Washington state's wolf problem, it might have gone something like Rep. Joel Kretz's recent bill on the issue.
"The Legislature finds that the rich habitat created by the land
stewardship of Washington's private landowners has created circumstances
that allow the state to enjoy an expanding gray wolf population," Kretz
wrote. "Unfortunately, however, this bounty has been geographically
limited to areas in eastern Washington and the entire citizenship of the
state has not been fully able to enjoy the reestablishment of this
majestic species."
Rep. Kretz, R-Wauconda, introduced the semi-tongue-in-cheek bill a few
weeks ago, aiming to transfer some of northeastern booming Washington's
wolf population to the Olympic Peninsula. Or, for that matter, to any
Puget Sound Island of 50 square miles or more — the minimum roaming area
for a single gray wolf.
Though Washington's master plan has been to scatter reinstated wolf
packs somewhat evenly around the state, most have, in reality, clumped
in Washington's northeast corner. That same corner is home to more than a
few livestock owners who have seen a not-incidental spate of wolf
attacks on their livestock. Kretz's bill is just one of a handful
introduced in the last few weeks that takes a stab at determining just
how wolves and humans can best co-exist.
So far, Sen. John Smith, R-Colville, and Sen. Pam Roach, R-Auburn, have proposed a handful of solutions, including:
-
Creating a $50,000 fund to compensate ranchers and farmers for wolf-destroyed livestock. Money
would be raised by special wolf license plates costing $40 initially
and $30 for renewal. The bill would declare gray wolves "big game,"
which means anyone caught illegally shooting wolves would be strapped
with a mandatory state fine of $4,000 on top of the normal criminal
penalty of up to $5,000 and up to one year in jail.
-
Allowing someone to shoot a wolf that is attacking livestock at that moment.
-
Giving county governments the authority to order
the killing of a wolf if at least two attacks on livestock have
occurred, a pattern of predation becomes apparent or the state is not
dealing with the situation.
"Wolves aren't angels or devils," said Mitch Friedman, executive
director of Bellingham-based Conservation Northwest, at a Senate Natural
Resources Committee hearing on the bills. "They can respond to
management techniques."
Gray wolves are listed as federally endangered in the
western two-thirds of the state, and are on Washington's endangered
species list for the entire state. In 2012, there were an estimated 51
to 101 wolves living in Washington, according to Dave Ware, the game
division manager for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
Fifteen of those have been tagged with electronic tracking collars and
are members of six of the state's eight confirmed packs. Three
additional packs are suspected, but not confirmed.
The state's goal is to build up a population that includes 15 breeding
pairs of wolves — at least one pair per pack — with a minimum of four
breeding pairs in each third of the state. So far though, reality has
been a little different. Six of the eight confirmed packs are in
northeastern Washington, with another in the Teanaway area near
Snoqualmie Pass and the eighth further north in the Cascade Mountains.
Not surprisingly, those northeastern wolves are hungry. During 2012,
Washington's wolves killed nine cows and sheep and wounded 15 more. One
Stevens County ranch bore the brunt of the impact, losing six cows and
seeing 10 more injured. The owner — for an undisclosed reason — decided
not to seek state compensation for the lost value of the livestock,
which was roughly $100,000. In a very controversial move, the state
killed seven wolves in that area because of the string of attacks.
"Having this type of predator being reintroduced is devastating to our
ranchers," Ferry County Commissioner Brad Miller explained at the bills'
hearing.
County commissioners from Stevens, Okanogan, Pend
Oreille and Ferry counties showed up in support of the bills. As did
seven small ranchers from around the state. But commissioners also
pointed to the Stevens County rancher who lost $100,000 worth of
livestock last year, arguing that $50,000 is too small for a state
compensation fund.
Popular opinion on the subject is split. One survey Ware cited found
that 75 percent of Washingtonians support wolves returning to
Washington, but that that percentage drops significantly in rural areas.
Further, 66 percent of Washingtonians supported the right of farmers
and ranchers to shoot wolves that kill livestock.
Roger Chapanis of Sammammish is one of the exceptions. ""On the
surface, it sounds like good intentions," he said. "At night, I fear it
will lead to killing anything that moves."
There are several non-lethal ways ranchers can stave off
wolves, which Ware outlined at the meeting: Scattering wolf scat and
urine around a ranch to fool a wolf pack into thinking another pack is
already there; using a line with red and orange flags hanging from it,
which for some reason wolves won't cross; and hiring range riders to
patrol a ranch or group of ranches when a tracking collar alerts the
state that a pack is in the area.
At least some farmers at the hearing seemed open to these methods,
including Tyler Cox, a small rancher from Walla Walla. "We don't want to
kill wolves. We want to sell calves," he said.
source
No comments:
Post a Comment